News
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk explains why Blue Origin’s Starship lawsuit makes no sense
For the first time since SpaceX competitor Blue Origin took NASA to federal court after losing a Moon lander contract to Starship and a protest over that loss, unsealed documents have finally revealed the argument Jeff Bezos’ space startup is focusing on in court.
After the details broke in new court documents filed on Wednesday, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk weighed in on Twitter to offer his take on why the arguments Blue Origin has hinged its lawsuit on make very little sense.
While one seemingly significant portion of the main complaint claiming to reveal “additional substantial errors” in SpaceX’s Starship HLS proposal was almost fully redacted, most of the opening argument is legible. In short, Blue Origin appears to have abandoned the vast majority of arguments it threw about prior to suing NASA and the US government and is now almost exclusively hinging its case on the claim that SpaceX violated NASA’s procurement process by failing to account for a specific kind of prelaunch review before every HLS-related Starship launch.
For NASA’s HLS competition, SpaceX proposed to create a custom variant of Starship capable of serving as a single-stage-to-orbit crewed Moon lander with the help of the rest of the Starship fleet – including Super Heavy boosters, cargo/tanker Starships, and a depot or storage ship. SpaceX would begin a Moon landing campaign by launching a (likely heavily modified) depot Starship into a stable Earth orbit. Anywhere from 8 to 14 Starship tanker missions – each carrying around 100-150 tons of propellant – would then gradually fill that depot ship over the course of no more than six or so months. Once filled, an HLS lander would launch to orbit, refill its tanks from the depot ship, and make its way to an eccentric lunar orbit to rendezvous with NASA’s Orion spacecraft and three Artemis astronauts.
As Blue Origin has exhaustively reminded anyone within earshot for the last five months, SpaceX’s Starship Moon lander proposal is extremely complex and NASA is taking an undeniable risk (of delays, not for astronauts) by choosing SpaceX. Nevertheless, NASA’s Kathy Lueders and a source evaluation panel made it abundantly clear in public selection statement that SpaceX’s proposal was by far the most competent, offering far a far superior management approach and technical risk no worse than Blue Origin’s far smaller, drastically less capable lander.
The bulk of Blue Origin’s argument appears to be that its National Team Lander proposal was drastically disadvantaged by the fact that SpaceX may or may not have incorrectly planned for just three ‘flight readiness reviews’ (FRRs) for each 16-launch HLS Starship mission. While heavily redacted, Blue Origin wants a judge to believe that contrary to the US Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) fair assessment that such a small issue is incredibly unlikely to have changed the competition’s outcome, it would have “been able to propose a substantially lower price” for its lander. To be clear, a flight readiness review is an admittedly important part of NASA’s safety culture, but it ultimately amounts to paperwork and doublechecks over the course of a day or two of meetings.
All else equal, the need to complete an FRR before a launch is incredibly unlikely to cause more than a few days of delays in a worst-case scenario and would have next to no cost impact. There is no reasonable way to argue that being allowed to complete some launches without an FRR would have singlehandedly allowed Blue Origin to “[engineer] and [propose] an entirely different architecture.” Nevertheless, that’s exactly what the company attempts to argue – that it would have radically and completely changed the design it spent more than half a billion dollars sketching out if it had only been able to skip a few reviews.
Curiously, Blue Origin nevertheless does make a few coherent and seemingly fact-based arguments in the document. Perhaps most notably, it claims that when NASA ultimately concluded that it didn’t have funds for even a single award (a known fact) and asked SpaceX – its first choice – to make slight contract modifications to make the financial side of things work, NASA consciously chose to waive the need for an FRR before every HLS Starship launch. Only via purported cost savings from those waived reviews, Blue Origin claims, was NASA able to afford SpaceX’s proposal – which, it’s worth noting, was more than twice as cheap as the next cheapest option (Blue Origin).
Ultimately, it thus appears that Blue Origin may have a case to make that NASA awarded SpaceX the HLS Option A contract despite a handful of errors that violated contracting rules and the HLS solicitation. Relative to just about any other possible issue, though, it’s hard not to perceive the problems Blue Origin may or may have correctly pointed out as anything more than marginal and extraordinarily unlikely to have changed the outcome in Blue’s favor had they been rectified before the award. Most importantly, even if Blue Origin’s argument is somehow received favorably and a judge orders NASA to overturn its SpaceX HLS award and reconsider all three proposals, it’s virtually inconceivable that even that best-case outcome would result in Blue Origin receiving a contract of any kind.
News
Tesla just unlocked sales to 50,000+ government agencies
It marks a significant step in expanding Tesla’s presence in the public sector, where procurement processes have traditionally slowed electric vehicle adoption.
Tesla just unlocked sales to over 50,000 government agencies by entering a new agreement with Sourcewell, a purchasing cooperative.
Tesla entered a new master purchasing agreement with Sourcewell, the largest government purchasing cooperative in the U.S. This will enable streamlined sales of its EVs to more than 50,000 U.S. public entities. Tesla entered Designated Contract 0813525-TES, and the agreement covers Model 3, Model Y, and Cybertruck, and potentially other vehicles the company could release.
It marks a significant step in expanding Tesla’s presence in the public sector, where procurement processes have traditionally slowed electric vehicle adoption.
The deal allows eligible agencies, including cities, school districts, state governments, and higher-education institutions, to purchase Tesla vehicles directly through Sourcewell without conducting their own lengthy competitive bidding or request-for-proposal (RFP) processes.
Pricing is pre-negotiated and capped, providing transparency and predictability. Agencies simply register for a Sourcewell account online or by phone and place orders under the existing contract. This cooperative model aggregates demand across thousands of members, reducing administrative costs and time while ensuring compliance with public procurement rules.
For Tesla, the agreement removes major barriers to government fleet sales. Public-sector procurement cycles often stretch 12 to 18 months due to bidding requirements and committee reviews.
Tesla buyers in the U.S. military can get $1,000 off Cybertruck purchases
By securing the master contract, Tesla gains immediate, simplified access to a massive customer base that previously faced friction in adopting EVs. The company highlighted in its announcement that the partnership will help these 50,000-plus agencies “save thousands of $$$ in operating costs for their vehicle fleet over time” through lower maintenance, energy efficiency, and the elimination of tailpipe emissions.
The initial four-year term runs through November 13, 2029, with options for up to three one-year extensions, offering long-term stability for both parties.
Sourcewell’s role is central to execution. As a cooperative purchasing organization, it negotiates and manages vendor contracts on behalf of its members, then makes them available nationwide. Participating entities contact Tesla’s dedicated fleet team or Sourcewell representatives to complete purchases, bypassing redundant paperwork.
This structure accelerates fleet electrification while maintaining fiscal accountability—agencies receive pre-vetted pricing and terms without reinventing the wheel for each vehicle order.
The partnership positions Tesla to capture a larger share of the public fleet market, where total cost of ownership often favors electric vehicles once procurement hurdles are removed.
For government buyers, it translates to faster deployment of sustainable fleets, reduced long-term expenses, and alignment with environmental mandates. As more agencies transition, the contract could contribute to broader EV infrastructure growth and taxpayer savings across the country.
Elon Musk
How much of SpaceX will Elon Musk own after IPO will surprise you
SpaceX’s IPO filing confirms Musk will maintain his voting power to make key decisions for the company.
Elon Musk will retain dominant voting control of SpaceX after it goes public, according to the company’s IPO prospectus that was filed with the SEC. The filing reveals a dual-class equity structure giving Class B shareholders 10 votes each, concentrating power with Musk and a handful of other insiders, while Class A shares sold to public investors carry one vote.
Musk holds approximately 42% of SpaceX’s equity and controls roughly 79% of its votes through super-voting shares. He will simultaneously serve as CEO, CTO, and chairman of the nine-member board after the listing. Beyond that, the filing includes provisions that may limit shareholders’ influence over board elections and legal actions, forcing disputes into arbitration and restricting where they can be brought.
The case for Musk holding this level of control is grounded in SpaceX’s actual history. The company’s most important bets, from reusable rockets to a global satellite internet constellation, were decisions that ran against conventional aerospace thinking and would likely have faced resistance from a board accountable to investor gains. Fully reusable rockets were considered economically irrational by established industry players for years. Starlink, which now generates over $4 billion in annual operating profit, was widely dismissed as financially unviable when it was proposed. The argument for concentrated founder control seems straightforward, and the decisions that built SpaceX into what it is today required someone willing to ignore consensus and absorb years of losses.
SpaceX files confidentially for IPO that will rewrite the record books
For context, Musk’s position is significantly more dominant than Zuckerberg’s at Meta. The comparison with Tesla is also worth noting. When Tesla did its IPO in 2010, it did not issue dual-class shares. Musk has only recently pushed for enhanced voting protection, proposing at least 25% control at Tesla in 2024 after selling shares to fund his Twitter acquisition left him with around 13%.
SpaceX has clearly learned from that experience and structured the IPO differently by planning to allocate up to 30% of shares to retail investors, roughly three times the typical norm for a large offering. The roadshow is expected to begin the week of June 8, with a Nasdaq listing rumored to be a $1.75 trillion valuation and a $75 billion raise.
News
Tesla bolsters App with new safety, insurance, and storage features
The Tesla Smartphone App is one of the biggest and best features and advantages owners have. Everything from moving the vehicle with Summon, to getting Navigation sent to the car, to preconditioning the cabin can be done with the Tesla App.
Tesla is bolstering its smartphone App with a series of new features to streamline operations for owners. The new additions include fixes to safety, its in-house insurance offering, and storage management for Dashcam clips.
The Tesla Smartphone App is one of the biggest and best features and advantages owners have. Everything from moving the vehicle with Summon, to getting Navigation sent to the car, to preconditioning the cabin can be done with the Tesla App.
But in classic Tesla fashion, the company is aiming to improve the offerings of the app, and it is doing so with a handful of new features. They were first discovered by Tesla App Updates.
Tesla Insurance – Safety Score 3.0
This is truly part of the Spring 2026 Update, but Tesla has now given more transparency on how FSD has saved people money on their premiums.
Tesla intertwines FSD with in-house Insurance for attractive incentive
Additionally, Tesla is now automatically awarding a Safety Score of 100 for every mile traveled on Full Self-Driving (Supervised).
Update Tracking
Updates traditionally appear on the App or on the Center Touchscreen in the car. There is nothing better than seeing that Green Arrow at the top of the screen, or opening your app and seeing that there is a Software Update available.
Now, there will be no need to manually check the app and initiate the download. Tesla is enabling a new feature that will automatically download updates for you.
Storage Management
Your USB drive can now be remotely formatted, and old Dashcam clips can be deleted straight from the phone. When you record a lot of things using the Dashcam feature, that storage fills up pretty quickly.
Now, manually deleting the Dashcam videos is easier than ever.
Trailer Light Test
This is perhaps the coolest and most crucial addition to the Tesla App, as those who tow and haul will now be able to trigger a diagnostic light sequence from the app while standing behind your trailer to ensure the brake lights work.
Verifying your trailer lights are connected properly and operating normally and as intended is normally a massive hassle.
Now, a new trigger will be available to initiate a diagnostic light sequence directly from your phone.
Why SpaceX just made a $60 billion bet on AI coding ahead of historic IPO
Tesla just unlocked sales to 50,000+ government agencies
